If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Please use the contact us link at the bottom of the page for issues, complaints, and/or questions. Contacting any other persons within the AVfM Organization will not garner the "trickle down effect" nor will it get you a quicker response.
Al

NOTICE:
The views expressed by the members of this forum DO NOT necessarily reflect the views of A Voice for Men (AVFM), its owner, or its management.

But that's the irony that feminists wont appreciate until some situation arises that actually forces them to look at their own flaws: strong females are strong precisely because they've had to face their own flaws.....not because they were born with a vagina. The women who want to believe that a flawless female character is an archetype of "strong femininity" are simply attempting to mask their own flaws with fantasy, never to embrace what those flaws have to teach them.

Guys, I don't know how much feminist critical writing on media you guys actually consume.

But a lot of feminist film and media critics bitch plenty about 'strong' and 'flawless' and 'perfect' female characters TOO.

Generally speaking feminist critics bitch. That's their job.

Give them a bit of time and they'll bitch about Rey too (if they aren't already).

Here's the trick...WHATEVER female character is created by writers, feminists will find a way to bitch about it.

When a character is 'strong' like Rey at 'man stuff' like fighting and flying ships and isn't doing those things in a bikini or thong then feminists generally complain that she is 'unrealistic' and 'unrelatable', that her perfection makes young girls feel insecure rather than inspired by comparison, that she is really a male-power fantasy that is based on and informed through understanding power and strength in terms of proficiency in exclusively traditionally masculine pursuits and that this is a male-centric and therefore inherently 'sexist' definition of power and strength in the first place.

You can't WIN.

Because they don't really have a point.

Their point is to bitch about whatever is someone else creates and puts in front of them.

If on the flip side the character is a single mom struggling to juggle two jobs and three child and make her rent payments on time then feminist critics will bitch that it's an offensive portrayal because it's depicting a single mom as some who is struggling to make ends meet is constantly stressed clearly needs a man (and/or relies on others to help her out etc), rather than 'super' capable and 'independent'.

The only way to win the game is to not play at all.

Feminist critics are professional bitches. They are paid to find things to bitch about.

Comment

Whenever discussion breaks out on feminism in movies and TV I all too often get the sense that many of my fellow AvFM'ers aren't really very good at actually identifying and highlighting exactly when and why a given work is (or isn't) promoting a feminist ideological agenda.

It's a little bit more complicated than merely focusing on positive and negative traits on display. A movie where the majority of male characters are 'good' and the majority of female ones are 'bad' doesn't automatically become 'pro-male' or anti-feminist.

Feminism is an ideology. Promoting it through media is a little bit more complex than merely attributing positive qualities to female characters and negative qualities to male ones.

Good compelling characters have flaws and make mistakes, flat ones do not. Generally speaking a character without too many tangible flaws or short comings is a mary sue. That's evidence of bad writing, but it's not evidence in and of itself of feminist ideological content. Even in cases where the flawless character happens to a female.

Take a movie like Anchorman. It's a favorite among many macho dudes and slackers. And yet it's explicitly speaking a feminist film informed by feminist ideology and promoting a feminist world view. It tells the story of Veronica Corningstone a plucky female journalist who shows up at a 1970s news station and upsets the status quo, a very literal and cartoonish representation of the 'old boys club' headed by a cartoon misogynist in the titular Ron Burgendy.

Now a lot of dude growing up in a generation where they have to tread on egg shells and mind ever utterance in work places full of women swanning and userpting them thanks to affirmative action and preferential treatment rather than merit like this movie and this character exactly because Ron goes around saying and doing all the things they wish they could do.

But ultimately it's a movie about taming the traditionalist patriarchal misogynistic dinosaur. Over the course of the story Ron is forced into mending his ways or facing extinction. The fact that he's ultimately passed over and missed out of a promotion to a far less experienced female co worker is played for laughs but that doesn't disguise the fact that the film invites him to like it or lump it. To change with the times or get 'left behind'.

Another film maker who makes explicitly and overtly feminist movies and tv shows is Joss Whedon. But his work doesn't in simplistic terms promote a feminist agenda by merely making all the females good and capable and all the males bad and useless it's a bit more complicated than that. In the world according Joss Whedon traditionally masculine males tend to serve as the villains while noble females assisted by nerdy mangina 'new man' types tend to function as the audiences point of view characters.

In ensemble pieces like the Avengers a feminist writer like Whedon essentially uses the other characters to mock the traditional masculine virtues of the Captain America character and play for the laughs the fact that his traditional no nonsense masculinity is a useless relic of a by gone pre-feminist age.

Feminist critics are very experienced in terms of breaking down and pointing out instances of sexism and misogyny in various creative works, and like I mentioned in my previous post their objectives shift the only consist thing is always finding an angle to bitch about.

If MRA want to provide a counter narrative we need to play smarter. Firstly we need to do away with unhelpful terms and ideas like 'pro-male'.

They are anti-traditionally masculine males...who are reduced to villains or the butt of smug progressive jokes about how backwards they are.

Creative works operating from a feminist ideological view point don't simply cast ALL MALES as 'bad' and ALL FEMALES as 'good'. They operate in much more complex ways to celebrate and encourage certain TYPES of males and to demonize or mock other TYPES of males.

If in a given movie, the type of males constantly being celebrated and upheld as 'good' are nerdy beta male feminists and the type of males being constantly demonized as rapey villains or mocked as old-fashioned 'alpha' 'jerk' sexist dinosaurs then you can explicitly point to a given work as guilty of promoting an overt and direct feminist agenda.

But we have gotta learn to look BEYOND the simple males as 'bad guys'/females as 'good guys' stuff.

What KIND of males does a movie (or show) celebrate?
What KIND of males does a movie (or show) demonize or mock?

What KIND of females does a movie (or show) celebrate?
What KIND of females does a movie (or show) demonize or mock?

Comment

But we have gotta learn to look BEYOND the simple males as 'bad guys'/females as 'good guys' stuff.

In males as bad guys thing, the bad guys are always given very masculine qualities. I remember one exception and that is from The PowerPuff Girls of all things, I remember there was a devil like thing who was a man but had feminine qualities. All the rest are very, what you would call 'alpha'.

I have nothing against strong female protagonists even if they fight men. Disney itself gave the best example of this with Kim Possible. The main villian is Dracan but there are also female villians, the best one being Shego. Her father, her sidekick Ron and her tech and her brothers are great male protagonists in the series and her father and Ron get their own arch-nemesis who even Kim can't fight and she is bad at things they are great at. And she is flawed, being the only non-genius in an all genius family of a literal rocket scientist father and a brain surgeon mother.

I think you just want to give Star Wars a free pass because it is Star Wars. Even being Luke's daugher should not give her the kind of abilities I hear she has. I am guessing you also defended Jar Jar and Lucas' digital reprint.
I want to restrict Star Wars because it is post-Maleficent, post-Frozen Disney. Those two are essentially I Spit on Your Grave for kids.

Comment

I think you just want to give Star Wars a free pass because it is Star Wars. Even being Luke's daugher should not give her the kind of abilities I hear she has.

I'm not giving anything a free pass for any reason. Ever. It's not my style.

Obviously there is an overt attempt to 'up date' the star wars universe and put a chick front and center of it. But that's as much to do with market forces as 'pushing' 'feminism'.

It's not pushing feminism so much as EVOKING feminism because it's already been 'pushed' into the mainstream consciousnesses in the first place.

Women and young girls have been increasingly DRIVING the sci-fi and fantasy markets in the west in recent years.

Most children in the US are raised by single moms. Moms decide who sees what at the pictures DADs don't.

It wouldn't make business sense to build the reboot, rehash of the star wars franchise around anything other than a young female lead.

But that has to be balanced up against the fact that too much overty in your face liberal feminist bullshit ALSO turns off very important sections of the western and global audience (in non-feminist places like Asia and the Middle East).

So it's a balancing act. Just a bit of 'gurrrl power' stuff. But not too much, just a bit of Harrison Ford 'the golden oldie still does it best' but not too much, Just a bit of black guy doing the 12 years a storm trooper, but not too much.

Just enough to get most people (of various faiths and political stripes) on side and secure their $$$

Even being Luke's daugher should not give her the kind of abilities I hear she has.

Not on it's own. But there's a cryptic flashback sequence in there that hints at her past.

No one bitching about the feminism seems to want to talk about it.

IF it's revealed that she has previous force training that she was for some reason made to suppress the memory of then a lot of the charges related to how quickly and easily she picks up all these force powers relative to male jedi counter parts in the previous movies suddenly ceases to be as valid.

I want to restrict Star Wars because it is post-Maleficent, post-Frozen Disney. Those two are essentially I Spit on Your Grave for kids.

I'm not 'defending' Star wars.

I'm just saying feminism is a pretty complex ideological and political belief system. We can't effectively understand and expose it's influence on popular culture simply by pointing at movies where chicks 'do stuff' and bitching about how that alone is evidence of feminist ideological underpinnings.

Comment

Guys, I don't know how much feminist critical writing on media you guys actually consume.

But a lot of feminist film and media critics bitch plenty about 'strong' and 'flawless' and 'perfect' female characters TOO.

Generally speaking feminist critics bitch. That's their job.

Give them a bit of time and they'll bitch about Rey too (if they aren't already).

Here's the trick...WHATEVER female character is created by writers, feminists will find a way to bitch about it.

When a character is 'strong' like Rey at 'man stuff' like fighting and flying ships and isn't doing those things in a bikini or thong then feminists generally complain that she is 'unrealistic' and 'unrelatable', that her perfection makes young girls feel insecure rather than inspired by comparison, that she is really a male-power fantasy that is based on and informed through understanding power and strength in terms of proficiency in exclusively traditionally masculine pursuits and that this is a male-centric and therefore inherently 'sexist' definition of power and strength in the first place.

You can't WIN.

Because they don't really have a point.

Their point is to bitch about whatever is someone else creates and puts in front of them.

If on the flip side the character is a single mom struggling to juggle two jobs and three child and make her rent payments on time then feminist critics will bitch that it's an offensive portrayal because it's depicting a single mom as some who is struggling to make ends meet is constantly stressed clearly needs a man (and/or relies on others to help her out etc), rather than 'super' capable and 'independent'.

The only way to win the game is to not play at all.

Feminist critics are professional bitches. They are paid to find things to bitch about.

Comment

In males as bad guys thing, the bad guys are always given very masculine qualities. I remember one exception and that is from The PowerPuff Girls of all things, I remember there was a devil like thing who was a man but had feminine qualities. All the rest are very, what you would call 'alpha'.

That's because feminism isn't about demonizing 'all' males. Never has been never will be.

Feminist ideology NEEDS men in order to function. It needs men to enforce it upon and promote it to OTHER MEN.

It operates by turning some men against other men.

It works to do this in a number of ways one is through leveraging praise and shame, directing the latter at manginas and the former at red pillers, masculine men and any man generally calling bullshit on feminists and feminism generally.

Its works to do with by promoting racial and cultural divisions, demonizing men of certain races or faiths but identifying their cultures as 'backwards' and 'misogynistic' and of course heaping praise on males who join feminists in mocking denouncing or attacking these targeted races, faiths and cultures.

Comment

say what you want about George Lucas but I doubt he would have made the character such a blatant Mary Sue if he was involved. I also think he would have created some planets that didn't look exactly like the planets from the original trilogy but with different names!

unfortunately it is written by a man so the author will immediately be dismissed as a misogynist. Hopefully more women, like in the article I posted earlier, also speak up. I am not holding my breath though

Comment

Good compelling characters have flaws and make mistakes, flat ones do not. Generally speaking a character without too many tangible flaws or short comings is a mary sue. That's evidence of bad writing, but it's not evidence in and of itself of feminist ideological content. Even in cases where the flawless character happens to a female.

So this is really what I was bemoaning. The general lack of depth of most characters in modern pop culture. I'm willing to admit that there may be a little big of selection bias in me claiming it's more prevalent for women than men. But it sort of makes sense when you consider that women are generally "valuable" because they carry eggs whereas men are only considered valuable for what they accomplish or can bring to the table in terms of money.

The question is, has the writing just gotten worse, or have the focus groups showed that people generally don't appreciate characters with depth. Art leading life or life leading art, right?

"...but when she goes off you, she will not just walk away, she will walk away with your fucking skin in a jar." ~~ DoctorRandomercam
"The laws of man, they don't apply when blood gets in a woman's eye" - The Black Keys

Comment

The question is, has the writing just gotten worse, or have the focus groups showed that people generally don't appreciate characters with depth. Art leading life or life leading art, right?

This is at least to some extent a generational thing. You watch old Bogart movies from the 30s and 40s and males leads are deeply complex flawed they get led by their dicks into danger by two-faced dames all the time, they back stab each other and whenever they embark on wars or misadventures they frequently fail outright or end up dead at the very least it's never plain sailing.

Generally speaking modern audiences (male and female) are pussies, that wanna perpetuate the protective bubble of a childish outlook on life long into adulthood.

That's reflected in pop culture, directed at males and females alike.

They don't like movies and stories to promote the idea that success comes after hard work and sacrifice. That getting anywhere or achieving anything worth doing, demands dedication and compromise and comes with great risk and cost.

They want milk and cookie fairy tales about 'special' people that the world just coughs up it's goodies for.

In their preferred version of the hare and tortoise they'd prefer the hare to just 'win' because he's the 'chosen one'.

How many of the current super hero movies actually feature characters (male or female) with flaws and depth and how many are just about some nerdy loser who discovers awesome powers and uses them to go around beating up jocks scoring the 'girl of his dreams' and generally being 'awesome'?

People defend these kinda movies and stories by claiming they are supposed to be 'wish fulfillment', but the truth is only children, nerds and pussies delight in watching characters triumph without paying dues, making sacrifices and facing adversity along the way.

That's hilarious. They probably left her out of the Boxed-set because they expect to be able to demand a premium for her and putting her in the boxed set effects the economics. Leaving her out of the boxed set is almost certainly saying she's more valuable, not less.

"...but when she goes off you, she will not just walk away, she will walk away with your fucking skin in a jar." ~~ DoctorRandomercam
"The laws of man, they don't apply when blood gets in a woman's eye" - The Black Keys

Comment

That's hilarious. They probably left her out of the Boxed-set because they expect to be able to demand a premium for her and putting her in the boxed set effects the economics. Leaving her out of the boxed set is almost certainly saying she's more valuable, not less.

Exactly.

There's a reason why feminists don't understand the first thing about business.